DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:56 am

According to an interview conducted by IAG with Geoff Thomas, senior editor of Aviation Transport World, Boeing has revealed that engines necessary to enable a 737 replacement may become available as early as 2011. The audio (available online) discusses how an unnamed engine supplier has discussed with Boeing their intention to formally offer an engine option in 2011 with a second supplier following in 2012.

If true, I believe there's a distinct possibility that a 737 replacement could enter airline service before 2015.

The whole interview covers a range of topics, with the 737/A320 replacement being discussed in the last 3/4:

http://www.iag-inc.com/pods/thomas.mp3
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:17 am

I would think this is something Airbus does not want to hear.

Right now they have a lot of money tied up in projects and the concept of doing an A320 upgrade rather than a clean sheet is basically predicated on there not being new engines out there to make the 737RS worth doing. If things line up and Boeing is doing a new 737 type plane with highly efficient engines then Airbus is almost forced to compete. I am just not sure they have the money to do it right away with A350, A380 and other projects over their head already.
 
ScottB
Posts: 5456
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Thread starter):
If true, I believe there's a distinct possibility that a 737 replacement could enter airline service before 2015.

It seems that the 2012-2015 time frame would be about correct for the 737RS, given that the first two generations of the 737 lasted for roughly 15 years each, and the 737NG will celebrate the anniversary of the first 737-700 delivery to WN in late 2012. I would imagine that in time for a launch in 2008-2009, Boeing and its industrial partners would be able to apply lessons learned from the 787 program to the development of the 737RS. It's also my understanding that Boeing has been able to be aggressive on price with the 787 since it's less expensive to build; if this extends to the 737RS, they'd have a triple-threat: competitive acquisition cost, market-leading efficiency, and lower maintenance costs. (Of course, all this assumes they'd be able to deliver, but their track record is good so far.)

From a market timing perspective, it might well be difficult for Airbus to respond with a competitive product for several years. The A350 will consume development resources (and R&D cash) through 2012 or 2013. Would a re-engined A320 family be enough to compete (aside from on the basis of available delivery slots)?
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:21 am

Yes! There is a God! A replacement to those cramped 737s/320s! I for one can hardly wait seeing as the 737/320 are about the only airplanes I get to fly out of SAN these days.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:29 am

This marks another fairly major bit of talking about the 737rs by Boeing. I am looking for a product launch 08 or early 09 now with an EIS 3 years after that.

This is really going to put a LOT of pressure on Airbus. The announcement alone is going to cause them issues and with the 350XWB appearing to be slipping (still no committed funding for example) they really need to figure out what they are going to do.

My guess is the supplier in question for engine is probably PW. Call me crazy, but little birdies like chirping interesting things sometimes.

If this pans out (and frankly I don't see any major reasons it won't) folks on the Airbus side need to figure out what they are going to do.

(Before anyone slams me for being negative on Airbus here, look at the situation unbiasedly and they are in a bad spot. I'm trying to figure out what I would do if this comes to pass and I were them. Something drastic may be required, such as getting a Russian partner to designa 320RS frame completely. Maybe Putin can be of some use afterall)
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:33 am

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 3):
Yes! There is a God! A replacement to those cramped 737s/320s!

Well dont bet on them being spacious! The latest widebodys (787/A350) will only be equal or even less spacious than the best stuff flying today.

We presume that Y1 will be new everything, including fuselage diamater. But I wonder what is broken on the A320 that will need fixing. Looking at the 787 and old A350, where did the A350 fall down? Well fuselage width is the obvious one, but then I cant see anything wrong with the A320 width, both these planes will be six abreast anyway. The main stumbling block seems to me to be the fuselage material.
 
gbfra
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:50 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:33 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 1):
I am just not sure they have the money to do it right away with A350, A380 and other projects over their head already.

There is really no shortage of money in the world. Just ask banks, pensions funds, private equity firms or countries like China, Russia and some Arabians. The only trick is to attract this money.

I think the Airbus people are more worried about their development and engineering capacities than about money. That would be easy enough to find.

[Edited 2007-02-27 00:34:39]
The fundamental things apply as time goes by
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:36 am

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 4):
(Before anyone slams me for being negative on Airbus here, look at the situation unbiasedly and they are in a bad spot. I'm trying to figure out what I would do if this comes to pass and I were them. Something drastic may be required, such as getting a Russian partner to designa 320RS frame completely. Maybe Putin can be of some use afterall)

I agree you are being unbiased. Airbus would want new engines to come out in the 2015-2020 area rather than the 2007-2014 region. Basically Airbus really needs to finish one thing before the next starts, especially considering that a new composite narrow body would incorporate lots of lessons learned from the A350 project.
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:40 am

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 6):
There is really no shortage of money in the world. Just ask banks, pensions funds, private equity firms or countries like China, Russia and some Arabians. The only trick is to attract this money.

While that is true it is only if those people can expect a reasonable return on their investment in a reasonable amount of time. Speculative investors are one thing but I doubt you will find a ton of private banks wanting to get in line to finance an A320 replacement while the A350 still is not finished since their repayment would be threatened by both a failure of the A350, against which they would likely have no recourse, and then a failure of the A320 replacement.

Not to mention Airbus is still in the middle of Power 8.


Sure there is lots of money out there, the question is can Airbus get it at a price that allows them to be competitive.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:46 am

@EI:

Well that depends on what Boeing does. Lots of talk of twin aisle 737 replacement.

@gbfra:

You nailed it. Bodies are a problem much more than cash in so far as this little problem goes. Especially with them trying to cut bodies via attrition now. Hence why I suggested a Russian tie-up might be a good solution. Lots of talent in Russia.

@bigjku:

Well I agree with your time frames that would be ideal for Airbus. However I would add about 3 years to that before I considered them on par with Boeing as far as CFRP knowledge goes.

Remember Boeing chose CFRP and CFRP forced itself on Airbus. That suggests a lot of ground work done on Boeings side and learnings already in the bank, while Airbus still need to undertake that work, unfortunately for them, in tandem with development of the 350.

Finally a spun barrel is even more import in the NB market place for cost reasons alone. This is an area that under the current plan Airbus will have no experience come 2012.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
AA737-823
Posts: 4906
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:47 am

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 4):
My guess is the supplier in question for engine is probably PW.

Me too.
They've been squawking GTF for the last twenty years, but lately have really been making noise. Apparently they're ready to re-engine the A320 with it, and if they tweaked it even more, you just might have a 737RS engine candidate.
Meanwhile, CFM has said their LEAP56 project won't be ready for more years, and is Roller still trying to shove a scaled-down three spool RB-211 down our throats? Hmmm.
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:48 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 7):
I agree you are being unbiased. Airbus would want new engines to come out in the 2015-2020 area rather than the 2007-2014 region

2007? They wont be out until at least 2011 according to the thread starter! Many of the big 737 customers like Ryanair have their current order & delivery schedules running until 2012-14. The 737NG is selling as well now as it ever has been, so whats the rush? Boeing needed the 787 when it did because the 767 sales had gone down the toilet, and they were loosing too may sales to the A330. If I were boeing I would look at their traditional strategy of improving the 787 over the next few years with enhanced models. This may of course depend on when we see the A320E and the effect it has on the 737NGs sles.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:57 am

@ei:

As to why now: you have your competitor struggling, NOW is when you bury them.

All the BS about Boeing wants a competitor is just that. Fewer companies making credible competitors makes for more cash.

It's the killer instinct that lead Boeing to the top of the pile in the first place. It's also the killer instinct they lost in the 90s.

I for one would love to see the return of that ability to truly finish a competitor, not out of spite for Airbus, but more for the long-term health of Boeing.

Afterall Boeing is all that's left of so many great aviation companies. They have a torch to carry.

Besides I have a sneaking suspicion the "Russians are coming"
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:58 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
2007? They wont be out until at least 2011 according to the thread starter!

I was not saying it would be ready now. I am saying Airbus wants the engines to come out later than Boeing. I honestly think Boeing could start on a 737 replacement as soon as they know what engines are around that will make it worth while.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
The 737NG is selling as well now as it ever has been, so whats the rush?

Depends on how you are looking at business. Boeing may just want to get the jump on Airbus knowing that they cannot react right now and put pressure on the company. Also I suspect that if you use CFRP barrels in a 797 construction that you would cut your cost per airframe substantially. While there will be higher sunk cost than a traditional frame it would not surprise me if Boeing could have a lower relative airframe cost than either the 737 or the 320 with the amount of labor they would be able to save. Only they know but they might be able to make a killing on them if that is the case. You could sell it for equal or more than a 320 and have a huge profit margin for a while.

The details of the finance are something we are not really going to get access to. But if Boeing pushes the issue its because they think they can make more money by replacing the 737 than they can by keeping longer before replacing it.
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4920
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:59 am

I personally think it would be a big risk if Pratt & Whitney decides to work alone without IAE. Remember that P&W lost to GE and RR on the 787, and I wouldn't count on Boeing offering three engine options on the 737RS. If RR goes alone, they may be a viable competitor to CFM and their LEAP56, but I wouldn't say the same is true for P&W.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 14):
I personally think it would be a big risk if Pratt & Whitney decides to work alone without IAE.

Pratt may not want to share GTF technology with IAE.
 
Tangowhisky
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:26 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:21 am

After 11 posts, the subject has quickly shifted to "Will Airbus be ready, Boeing and engines will be". I will limit my speculation to the potential outcome on engines and Boeing.

2011-2012 powerplants being ready usually mean time for flight testing with the airframe. This can give Boeing the option to launch the 737RS as early as this year. But they will ride it out as the 737NGs are a cash cow, the 777s are becoming another herd of cash cows, while cash wont be coming in for the 787s until another 2-3 years, and the 748, another 4 years. Considering the recent disasters on their space programs, therefore at the earliest, they will start spending large sums of cash on a "true" 737RS development not before 2009-2010.

Meanwhile no engine manufacturer or consortium want to be left out. Just because PW is ready wont be good enough. In all likelihood there will be two engine choices for Y1, which means at least three offers must be available. Therefore PW, GE, RR, IAE, CFM will find a way to get at least three offers to Boeing. 2 engine choices will be made with 787 type interchangeability for greatest market liquidity (attractive to lessors, financiers, etc.)

As for fuselage widths. The recent statements made by Boeing that 2 fuselage widths make sense for the environment mean that they are going for it. They are basically telling Airbus that we will invest heavily, we have the human bodies, and we will demonstrate our green policies by coming up with a 90-140 and 150-220 seat two family replacement covering from the 737 Classics to the 757-200 capacity range. This puts greater market confusion if Airbus will be able to respond competitively, tells Bombardier and Embraer to back off, and tells the engine manufacturers that a smaller class of engines with commonality across the 90-220 seat range must be sought.
Only the paranoid survive
 
ScottB
Posts: 5456
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:22 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 13):
Also I suspect that if you use CFRP barrels in a 797 construction that you would cut your cost per airframe substantially. While there will be higher sunk cost than a traditional frame it would not surprise me if Boeing could have a lower relative airframe cost than either the 737 or the 320 with the amount of labor they would be able to save. Only they know but they might be able to make a killing on them if that is the case. You could sell it for equal or more than a 320 and have a huge profit margin for a while.

 checkmark 

I think that's the real reason that would drive Boeing to move on the 737RS, even if the 737NG is selling as fast as they can make them (which it is, currently). If they can drop the production cost per airframe, they can be even more competitive on price while simultaneously improving margins. Otherwise, it might make more sense to wait and see what Airbus puts into the market.
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:36 am

So how much of a drop in operating costs over the 737NG are we looking at here?
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:38 am

whats really funny has been the year or so that people have sworn up and down that the engines would not be available till 2015 or later so Airbus had some time to do its thing.

Since GE itself said it would have the 737RS engine done around 2012, announced shortly after Boeing admitted it was doing the 737RS studies
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:43 am

I've been saying for 2 years at least that it will be 2012. All the signs point to 2012. Boeing has a gap in flight testing commitments after Q2 2011. They will be freeing up many engineers by 2009, and even more by 2010. Their 737NG may be selling well, but the A320 is taking away former Boeing customers. And as for engines, they become available when manufacturers commit to them. I'm sure Boeing has gone to the engine companies long ago stating what they want and when they want it: 2008 launch commitment, 2011 for flight testing, 2012 for EIS.

I believe the 797 will be launched once 787 certification is complete, summer 2008 at an airshow. This way they can get maximum impact and be certain of the 787 technologies and which ones are of most benefit for a smaller jet.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:53 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
2011-2012 powerplants being ready usually mean time for flight testing with the airframe.

As Geoff mentioned, Boeing would be hard-pressed to deliver in 2012. IMO, a schedule that aggressive would mean proceeding with a single engine partner, which I suppose is a possible. However, I suspect Boeing will wait for two engine partners and an EIS of 2013-2014.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
This can give Boeing the option to launch the 737RS as early as this year.

I wouldn't go that far. If Boeing does anything in 2007, it will likely just be occasional talk about what could "hypothetically" replace the 737NG. Remember the 7E7. In 2002, there were maybe 3 press releases total about the new aircraft in consideration once the Sonic Cruiser was shelved. Then Boeing hit the ground running in 2003, with a launch in 2004.

We may hear a few more things in 2007, but the telling years (IMO) will be 2008-2009.

One final reason Boeing would be crazy to do anything major this year: it doesn't take Boeing longer than 4 years to develop a new airplane. For an EIS in 2013-2014, that means a launch in 2009-2010.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:26 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
while cash wont be coming in for the 787s until another 2-3 years,

I question this statement as Boeing will gein shipping 787s next year (actually a mere 15 or so months from now)

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
2 engine choices will be made with 787 type interchangeability for greatest market liquidity (attractive to lessors, financiers, etc.)

I suspect you will see a common pylon design that engine manufacturers are to design to. I see no reason to limit the RS to 2 engine suppliers as it is a huge market in terms of units and can easily support the development costs for 3 or more engine variants.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
As for fuselage widths. The recent statements made by Boeing that 2 fuselage widths make sense for the environment mean that they are going for it. They are basically telling Airbus that we will invest heavily, we have the human bodies, and we will demonstrate our green policies by coming up with a 90-140 and 150-220 seat two family replacement covering from the 737 Classics to the 757-200 capacity range. This puts greater market confusion if Airbus will be able to respond competitively, tells Bombardier and Embraer to back off, and tells the engine manufacturers that a smaller class of engines with commonality across the 90-220 seat range must be sought.

This I agree with fully  Smile

Quoting EI321 (Reply 18):
So how much of a drop in operating costs over the 737NG are we looking at here?

Boeing has stated a goal of AT LEAST 10% reduction in fuel. That coupled with CFRP maintenance savings could lead to operational savings of 15-20% annually.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20):
I believe the 797 will be launched once 787 certification is complete, summer 2008 at an airshow. This way they can get maximum impact and be certain of the 787 technologies and which ones are of most benefit for a smaller jet.

Agreed, but I expect a good deal of work is already done on these replacements (I think there will be 2 families, see above). The entire point of yellowstone was shared R&D across an entire platform of next-gen aircraft. Every day that goes by on Y2 (787) is contributing to Y1.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 21):
As Geoff mentioned, Boeing would be hard-pressed to deliver in 2012. IMO, a schedule that aggressive would mean proceeding with a single engine partner, which I suppose is a possible. However, I suspect Boeing will wait for two engine partners and an EIS of 2013-2014.

Disagree with you here. Boeing has publically committed to shorter dev cycles than they have had historical with a goal of 3 years announce->EIS. I can't see Boeing announcing Y1 later than 2009 which makes 2012 EIS. I honestly see Boeing announce in 2008, making EIS late 2011 early 2012 depending on just when and how much slack they give themselves.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 21):
Remember the 7E7. In 2002, there were maybe 3 press releases total about the new aircraft in consideration once the Sonic Cruiser was shelved. Then Boeing hit the ground running in 2003, with a launch in 2004.

Also remember what the purpose of Yellowstone was (see above) and further more that the 7E7 needed more groundwork to be laid than would the 737RS aircraft. The 7E7 was 'the first' of it's generation. The 737RS will merely be refinements of that techonology. Easier, faster and cheaper for Boeing. Additionally with all the squaking from Boeing in the last 1-2 years on the replacement, they seem to have a pretty damned good idea what customers want from the frames and that will make life even easier on them.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 21):
One final reason Boeing would be crazy to do anything major this year: it doesn't take Boeing longer than 4 years to develop a new airplane. For an EIS in 2013-2014, that means a launch in 2009-2010.

You're assuming that Boeing doesn't want to EIS in 2012 or 2011. As another poster pointed out GE is ready to rock in 2012, and PW is ostensibly good to go now, if rumours are to be believed. Why would they wait and give their competition any breathing room at all. Heap the pressure on them while you can.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
Tangowhisky
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:26 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:08 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 21):
Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
This can give Boeing the option to launch the 737RS as early as this year.

I wouldn't go that far.

Please read my entire post.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
But they will ride it out as the 737NGs are a cash cow,



Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
the earliest, they will start spending large sums of cash on a "true" 737RS development not before 2009-2010.



Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 22):
Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
while cash wont be coming in for the 787s until another 2-3 years,

I question this statement as Boeing will gein shipping 787s next year (actually a mere 15 or so months from now)

Cash trickling in is not the same as large flow of cash generation. This wont happen until the 787 production goes past the ramp up transition.

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 22):
see no reason to limit the RS to 2 engine suppliers as it is a huge market in terms of units and can easily support the development costs for 3 or more engine variants.

The more engine choices you feature, the greater the development cost, after sales support requirements etc. But the best reason to limit it to two is to have the best negotiation outcome as at least one player will have to lose out. Boeing will lose its negotiation leverage by having too many winners and too few losers.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20):
but the A320 is taking away former Boeing customers.

Isn't this more to do with who can find a plane quicker than which is better (A320 or 737NG)? In the 80's what you say is true as the Classics did not have the payload range of the A320 and Boeing lost many clients to Airbus.
Only the paranoid survive
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:14 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 23):
Cash trickling in is not the same as large flow of cash generation. This wont happen until the 787 production goes past the ramp up transition.

Boeing does have a fairly agressive ramp scheduled for the 787 production (if my memory hasn't failed me). I don't think it's a trickle even initially as the deliveries (again I believe) are supposed to ramp fairly quickly. Either way Boeing has good cashflow right now as it is and it's only going to be getting better.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 23):
The more engine choices you feature, the greater the development cost

Some of this is mitigated by the whole common pylon concept where Boeing specs for the manufacturers of the engines.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 23):
after sales support requirements etc. But the best reason to limit it to two is to have the best negotiation outcome as at least one player will have to lose out. Boeing will lose its negotiation leverage by having too many winners and too few losers.

There are ostensibly 5 'players' in the market for next gen narrow-body engines, GE, PW, RR, IEA and CFM. You could easily select 3 and still have 2 on the outside (yes I know IEA and CFM are JVs, but they will still fight hard). I agree on the after sales support side of the equation though.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
flyabunch
Posts: 443
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 1:42 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:39 am

Is everyone convinced that Boeing will insist on more than one engine mfg. being ready? They only have one supplier on the 737. I think that the situation has probably lost a few customers over the years but all in all you cannot fault their success.

I do agree with a common pylon design, engine manufactures can be added down the road.

Mike
 
DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:57 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 23):
Please read my entire post.

I am afraid that you are still flat wrong when you said "this can give Boeing the option to launch the 737RS as early as this year."

Boeing isn't launching a 737 replacement this year just because they want to ride the 737NG longer. They couldn't launch a 737 replacement this year even if they wanted to. I rarely make absolute statements, but I will absolutely state on the record that Boeing has neither the option nor the means to launch the 737RS this year. You can take that much to the bank.

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 22):
Boeing has stated a goal of AT LEAST 10% reduction in fuel. That coupled with CFRP maintenance savings could lead to operational savings of 15-20% annually.

Let's not forget that the advantages of CFRP are marginalized with smaller and smaller aircraft. It's going to take even more ambitious CFRP technology than what Boeing utilized for the 787 to enable a CFRP 737 replacement. That alone is going to preclude a 2008 launch. Some of the most important lessons with CFRP have yet to be learned, and will not be known until after the 787 enters revenue service.

You are being very hasty to suggest the 737RS will simply be an easier, faster, and cheaper variant of the 787.
 
siromega
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:15 pm

Didnt boeing try the common pylon with the 787 and it didnt work? It had to be the engine + pylon? I though I remember them abandoning the common pylon initiative a while ago. They probably could do it now if they wanted yes, I'm just trying to jog my memory.

Also, it would be a huge win for Boeing to have the EIS in 2012. By the time the A350-1000 comes out in 2015 they will have their Y3 craft annouced and be working on it for a possible EIS in 2018. I must say, it may take an extraordinary stumble for Airbus to catch up to Boeing anytime soon. I really dont see how Airbus can leverage a second mover strategy to leapfrog Boeing, who is hitting on all cylinders.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:21 pm

Quoting SirOmega (Reply 27):
Didnt boeing try the common pylon with the 787 and it didnt work?

To my knowledge, Boeing is still doing it, however the process for physically swapping a GE for an RR (or vice versa) still requires a few days of hangar time. It's easier to do so on a 787 then any other commercial airliner, but it still is not easy.  Smile
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:24 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 21):
IMO, a schedule that aggressive would mean proceeding with a single engine partner, which I suppose is a possible.

Boeing has a history recently of one engine supplier:

CFM - 737NG
GE - 777 Longer Range
GE - 748I/F

It's only the 787 that was launched with more than one, and that is because they demanded the engine makers work off the "single pylon" concept (though I think they have backed off that a tad, as now the pylon needs replacing too, just not the avionics).

If the 737RS is designed with a true standard pylon, then Boeing CAN launch it with just one engine, with other engine makers free to develop engines for the platform for EIS in 2013, 2014, whatever.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
siromega
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:31 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
To my knowledge, Boeing is still doing it, however the process for physically swapping a GE for an RR (or vice versa) still requires a few days of hangar time. It's easier to do so on a 787 then any other commercial airliner, but it still is not easy.

Maybe thats what it was then, Boeing promised 1 night turnaround on the engine swap and then they came out and said a few days. Which still isnt bad.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:38 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
Let's not forget that the advantages of CFRP are marginalized with smaller and smaller aircraft. It's going to take even more ambitious CFRP technology than what Boeing utilized for the 787 to enable a CFRP 737 replacement.

Frankly, you're wrong, at least as far as maintenance aspects are concerned. Given that short-hault AC accumulate even MORE cycles, the maintenance savings are greater for that type of aircraft.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
You are being very hasty to suggest the 737RS will simply be an easier, faster, and cheaper variant of the 787.

The entire premise of Yellowstone was commonality between aircraft of the new generation. One of the projects defining goals was that work on one member of the family should ease the development load of future members of the family (or at least that is how it was described to me, I have not personally seen the charter for the project). My reference to easier, faster and cheaper is with respect to the design phase of the aircraft.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:43 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 29):
Boeing has a history recently of one engine supplier:

CFM - 737NG
GE - 777 Longer Range
GE - 748I/F

To be fair to Boeing there, it's worth noting that the 737 was single-source since day 1 in 1965, (though it changed between the orignals and the classics...but only one suplier at a time on a model) so I'm not sure if that should count as "recent" history. Also, the vast majority of 777 sales to date have been split among the big 3, so that project was originally open for grabs.

If anything, I think the sales success of the C-market 777 might have caught Boeing by surprise. If they had known they could sell this many frames in such a short period of time, they might not have locked RR out of the field for risk sharing purposes. But then again, that's why it's called risk management. They saw it as a risky airplane(s) to develop, but it paid off.

Same might hold true for the 748...heck it's hard to see that being risky even, given the obvious demand the cargo version serves (with zero competition outside of older 744s).
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:05 pm

I've heard rumors and expectations of a 737RS entry into service date in 2012 and a A320 NSR entry in to service date of 2013. I think they are somewhat reliable, but can't divulge a source. They are guesses on when to expect future business. This information can be obtained by looking through the financial forecast plans available for investors for not only Boeing and Airbus but in particular by focusing on business plans for key suppliers which will be bidding soon for these contracts.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:11 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 33):
I've heard rumors and expectations of a 737RS entry into service date in 2012 and a A320 NSR entry in to service date of 2013.

not possible for Airbus to have the A320NSR done before 2020 or so. The A350XWB will eat all the R&D for new aircraft till 2015 minimum, possibly longer as there are alot of derivatives in a short period of time. Airbus also tends to take 5-6years for a new aircraft program vs 4 for Boeing.

Oh and gratz on the A320E winglets not working out.
 
luke7e7
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:25 pm

" GE, PW, RR, IEA and CFM " - since CFM is a 50% GE, why would they both be a player in this game?
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:35 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
Let's not forget that the advantages of CFRP are marginalized with smaller and smaller aircraft. It's going to take even more ambitious CFRP technology than what Boeing utilized for the 787 to enable a CFRP 737 replacement. That alone is going to preclude a 2008 launch. Some of the most important lessons with CFRP have yet to be learned, and will not be known until after the 787 enters revenue service.

It may not be that the plane is that much more efficient for airlines right out of the gate but if Boeing can build it more efficiently than the 737 they can increase their margin just through that.

How many people are on a 737 assembly line right now? I think I read that it will take 1,000 people for final assembly on the 787 and a whole lot of the subcontracting is to highly automated companies as the manufacturing process necessitates automation.

It sounds crass to say it but if Boeing can build a plane only marginally more efficient than the 737/320 but can do it for a lot less then they ought to go ahead and do it and fire the excess people. They can make improvements to the aircraft as it matures to make it more efficient but in the meantime they are can go ahead and get sub-contractors in place to produce the necessary parts and hull sections for the project.

Updates can always come 5-10 years down the road when you already have the necessary production infrastructure in place. By doing it now you make sure your competitors do not lock up the key suppliers internationally that you are going to need to make this project work. I think with the new technology of CFRP airplanes coming around the most important thing at present is to ensure that your company has access to those that have the know-how to produce the necessary parts. The absolute last thing you want if you are Boeing is to wait too long and find out that Airbus went ahead and locked up production from a key provider like Spirit and now you can't get what you need when you need it.
 
DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:37 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 31):

Frankly, you're wrong, at least as far as maintenance aspects are concerned. Given that short-hault AC accumulate even MORE cycles, the maintenance savings are greater for that type of aircraft.

I hate to confront you, but you do not know what you're talking about. The greatest advantages of CFRP is weight reduction, and smaller aircraft do not (yet) benefit from the dramatic weight reduction seen with larger aircraft. Maintenance reduction is/will always be a secondary benefit.

The materials technology used on the 787 will not cut it for a 737 replacement. Boeing has stated this in plain terms, and anyone with an ounce of materials background can understand why. The good news is developing the 787 will likely give Boeing the tools and experience to develop a second-generation of CFRP aircraft, but Boeing must complete all the follow-up work on the 787 for that to occur.

In other words 2008 launch is still extremely, extremely optimistic if not irrational.

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 31):
One of the projects defining goals was that work on one member of the family should ease the development load of future members of the family (or at least that is how it was described to me, I have not personally seen the charter for the project).

And to a degree, the 787 and the 737RS will do that. But in no way does that make an airline project "easy," "cheap," or "fast," because each market niche has its own unique challenges and considerations. It will be easier to develop a CFRP 737 replacement thanks to the 787, but it will still pose a challenge just like any other new aircraft project.

You seem to be forgetting that Yellowstone is a Utopian future of aircraft building, including some rather idealistic goals that are likely impossible or impractical to realize. Heck, the first byproduct of Yellowstone was not the 787, but the Sonic Cruiser and a trade study of two other SST. BCA is definitely changing the way aircraft are developed and built, but some of your suggestions contradict what is possible with current and cutting-edge engineering.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:40 pm

Quoting Luke7e7 (Reply 35):
" GE, PW, RR, IEA and CFM " - since CFM is a 50% GE, why would they both be a player in this game?



Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 24):
(yes I know IEA and CFM are JVs, but they will still fight hard). I agree on the after sales support side of the equation though.

If I'm not mistaken they are joint ventures and run independantly. CFM may bid one engine, GE something more proprietary. No reason to not bid from both ends. Ofcourse whether or not CFM even continues to exist as a viable 'engine maker' is questionable going forward (but the same would be said of PW)
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:42 pm

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 36):
It sounds crass to say it but if Boeing can build a plane only marginally more efficient than the 737/320 but can do it for a lot less then they ought to go ahead and do it and fire the excess people

It isn't crass at all, and it's another excellent point that should be listed well before the maintenance advantages that some are beating around. Consider the price of labor abroad, and the only way to stay competitive is increase production efficiency.

One of the hypothetical innovations from second-generation CFRP is increasing the size of the fuselage barrels such that fewer and fewer segments are needed. Perhaps even a single barrel fuselage...
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:50 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 39):

One of the hypothetical innovations from second-generation CFRP is increasing the size of the fuselage barrels such that fewer and fewer segments are needed. Perhaps even a single barrel fuselage...

I think this is probably the "Holy Grail" of airliner construction. A one piece would be ideal but if you could get it down to 3 pieces you would have done a ton.

It will be very interesting to see, not that we will ever know as it would be a tightly kept secret, exactly how much it cost Boeing to build a 787 vs say a 767. Granted there is the R&D cost you have to make back, but the bottom line price on an airplane, ie just how low you can sell the thing for assuming you have a good reason, is set by how much it cost to push the thing out the door.

I still think that getting the infrastructure tied to your company and getting their capacity spun up is more important at this point than getting the plane 100% correct on the first model. First you need to get a capacity to build 20-40 of these things a month or there is no point to even designing the thing. For that reason alone I think a late 2008 start is not out of the question. Regardless of the exact type of material you use you know the basics of what you need. You need something to spin it and something to cook it.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:02 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
I hate to confront you, but you do not know what you're talking about. The greatest advantages of CFRP is weight reduction, and smaller aircraft do not (yet) benefit from the dramatic weight reduction seen with larger aircraft. Maintenance reduction is/will always be a secondary benefit.

Just where exactly did I state anything to the contrary?! Let me quote what I said again to clarify:

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 31):
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
Let's not forget that the advantages of CFRP are marginalized with smaller and smaller aircraft. It's going to take even more ambitious CFRP technology than what Boeing utilized for the 787 to enable a CFRP 737 replacement.

Frankly, you're wrong, at least as far as maintenance aspects are concerned.

Furthermore, on a shorthaul frame, maintenance aspects (reduced heavy checks) are a major benefit over traditional AL construction. Not once in this thread have I claimed the weight savings from a CFRP frame would be as dramatic for a short-range/NB aircraft.

Also, if you read my original statement which you took such exception to in the first place you will see that I'm merely relaying what Boeing has said publically. I am then back integrating the cost savings I would expect from a CFRP frame's maintenance savings.

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 22):
Boeing has stated a goal of AT LEAST 10% reduction in fuel. That coupled with CFRP maintenance savings could lead to operational savings of 15-20% annually.

You are arguing with me about a point I haven't even made on this thread (or any other thread for that matter). If you think maintenance issues aren't a significant feature for someone like a Southwest who is an LCC well I can't help you.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
The materials technology used on the 787 will not cut it for a 737 replacement. Boeing has stated this in plain terms, and anyone with an ounce of materials background can understand why. The good news is developing the 787 will likely give Boeing the tools and experience to develop a second-generation of CFRP aircraft, but Boeing must complete all the follow-up work on the 787 for that to occur.

Boeing has stated publically, many, many, many times, that the problem with launching an RS is the engines not being available. There have been quotes that say that almost verbatim. Boeing has already developed a substantial knowledge base around CFRP and a substantial toolset with which to work, there is not need for them to wait for 'all the follow-up work on the 787'. Sure as work on the 787 and it's derivatives continues they will continue to learn, but that doesn't preclude them from commencing work on the RS, especially if they are planning to split the segment into two frame sizes, one of which has virtually no credible competition.

I find it ironic that you don't think Boeing has been doing research into all (or at the very least some) the various aspects they need for the RS while working on the 787. Boeing was working on the 787 research long before the 787 was ever announced. There is not one viable reason to believe that a good portion of the ground work has not been completed. Do you think they magically acquire the knowledge when they announce the plane?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
In other words 2008 launch is still extremely, extremely optimistic if not irrational.

I can't phathom why you think this. Boeing has had all the time since they started working on the Sonic Cruiser to look into what they need to do for a 737RS. It's not like Boeing didn't know a 737 replacement would some day be needed. Any prudent project management team would leverage as much commonality in materials research to look at how to make both Y2 and Y1 (and Y3 for that matter) work. Or are you suggesting Boeing *only* looked at CFRP as it might apply to the 787 and learned nothing in the process of what would work for Y1 and Y3?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
And to a degree, the 787 and the 737RS will do that. But in no way does that make an airline project "easy," "cheap," or "fast," because each market niche has its own unique challenges and considerations.

When I say fast I'm not saying two days, nor am I saying cheap is $20, nor easy like riding a bike. These are relative terms in this case. Surely you can see that? Easier, cheaper and faster than the work on the initial member of the project. Again, that is a goal of the project.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
It will be easier to develop a CFRP 737 replacement thanks to the 787, but it will still pose a challenge just like any other new aircraft project.

Again, where did I say anything that contradicts that? I'm not suggesting Boeing can have one flying tomorrow. I'm working with their publically stated project timelines of 3 years from launch to EIS. You don't think Boeing said that just to blow smoke do you? Apparently they think they can deliver in those timelines, and until I hear differently from them, I'm inclined to believe them.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
You seem to be forgetting that Yellowstone is a Utopian future of aircraft building, including some rather idealistic goals that are likely impossible or impractical to realize. Heck, the first byproduct of Yellowstone was not the 787, but the Sonic Cruiser and a trade study of two other SST. BCA is definitely changing the way aircraft are developed and built, but some of your suggestions contradict what is possible with current and cutting-edge engineering.

Perhaps you shoud write Boeing and let them know their Yellowstone concept is severely flawed and there is nothing to be gained from such an approach to aircraft development. I told you what one of the stated goals of the project was, and you agreed that having the 787 would help RS development, yet you drag in some strawman about utopian ideals. My point was the commonality goal of yellowstone would ease 737RS development, to which you agreed. What possible relevance do SST variants have on the fact you agreed to?

Now, I'm sorry if I sound snarky, but you are accusing me of saying things I haven't said and arguing with me on points you've agreed with in the same post you are arguing against them in.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:04 pm

Prior to clean sheet replacements of the 737 and 320 families going into production at some point, I understood that there was a new engine variant becoming available for that class of A/C which is more fuel efficient, due in part to a larger fan, but that the 737 would not be able to incorporate it because of there not being enough room under the wing while on the ground.

It seems to me such an engine would give Airbus a serious leg up with regard to the remaining prospective sales of the 320 as compared to the 737 prior to those A/C families being replaced by a clean sheet design (NG and what have you).

Does anyone have any more information regarding the new engine I am referring to, whether it is in fact going into production, and what the prospects are for it to give the 320 a serious edge in the near future?
I come in peace
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:06 pm

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 42):
Does anyone have any more information regarding the new engine I am referring to, whether it is in fact going into production, and what the prospects are for it to give the 320 a serious edge in the near future?

I believe the engine you are thinking of a PW Geared Turbo Fan engine. Search the forums for PW GTF and it should turn up some good information. Last I heard PW had approached Airbus to do it, but Airbus had not yet comitted to slapping them on the 320s.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
grantcv
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:28 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:10 pm

Airbus is being caught in a trap of simply reacting to Boeing's every move. With sales of the A330 still strong, wouldn't it have been better for Airbus to have spent their upcoming R&D on coming up with a fix of sorts for the struggling A340 while leaving enough Euros to get a head start on an A320 replacement? Instead, Airbus is building the A350XWB which will largely end the A330/A340 a little bit prematurely while leaving themselves vulnerable in the bread and butter A320 market as well as leaving an even larger gap between the A350XWB and the A380 than existed between the A340 and the A380 (assuming that the A340 production run is largely spoken for by now).
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:53 pm

Quoting EI321 (Reply 5):
I cant see anything wrong with the A320 width, both these planes will be six abreast anyway.

Not necessarily, as tangowhisky points out:

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 16):
As for fuselage widths. The recent statements made by Boeing that 2 fuselage widths make sense for the environment mean that they are going for it.

It "could" be an opportunity for boeing to make the most widely used size aircraft much more comfortable, sort of what Airbus is trying to do with the 380 on the end of the spectrum. We can only hope!

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 9):
Bodies are a problem much more than cash in so far as this little problem goes. Especially with them trying to cut bodies via attrition now. Hence why I suggested a Russian tie-up might be a good solution. Lots of talent in Russia.

I hope Airbus ships its latest version of CATIA to Russia before they all get busy!

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 13):
Also I suspect that if you use CFRP barrels in a 797 construction that you would cut your cost per airframe substantially.

The clip posted recently by a fellow Anetter of the Seattle TV's investigation into the 787, supports this analysis. The report stated the So. Carolina (I believe it was this plant) which is producing portions of the fuselage, has only about 300 employees total. The report states this is an exponential decrease in the amount labor traditionally used to produce a fuselage. The other suppliers have similar numbers of attorneys. The report concluded that the 787 will not result in a boon to labor markets as so few employees are needed to assemble it.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 19):
whats really funny has been the year or so that people have sworn up and down that the engines would not be available till 2015 or later so Airbus had some time to do its thing.

I think I recall reading a few months back that Boeing was also swearing up and down that it was not seriously persuing the 737 replacement!

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 22):
You're assuming that Boeing doesn't want to EIS in 2012 or 2011.

Assuming Boeing does offer the replacement for EIS in 2011, what would that do with the hundreds of 737s on the order books through 2014? I can't believe Boeing would offer a new plane before closing up the 737 line, otherwise it is just cannibalizing firm orders already on the books.
 
797charter
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:32 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:54 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20):
All the signs point to 2012. Boeing has a gap in flight testing commitments after Q2 2011. They will be freeing up many engineers by 2009, and even more by 2010. Their 737NG may be selling well, but the A320 is taking away former Boeing customers.

Some good points, - make sense for me.
Keep it clear of the propellers
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 4:01 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
The greatest advantages of CFRP is weight reduction, and smaller aircraft do not (yet) benefit from the dramatic weight reduction seen with larger aircraft. Maintenance reduction is/will always be a secondary benefit.

I disagree, the main savings in a short haul with lots of cycles in comparison to hours flow will see the biggest advantage from CFRP construction from extending checks and reducing repairs required at said checks. Also frame life will be longer. In a medium range setting, they become close to equal, you save alot in both. For a long haul where you run 12+ hours on a cycle, the MX cost reductions become near trivial compared to the reduction of weight.

That said, The cost of production will be the major innovation for all sizes. I'm guessing that the 737RS will be 3 main barrels, with the center barrel cut for the wing box, and its total length changed for the various models. The minimum number of barrels will always be 2 + wing box unless you can somehow make a mandrel that folds up small enough to go out a cargo door... or a cheap way to do a mold that melts/disolves when done.

Oh and while the number of 737RS that can be made per line will go up drastically, if you want/need too, you can set up new lines anywhere w/o too much time or cost. So you could throw up a assembly line in Europe for those orders. One in China for those orders, etc.

Last... be interesting to see if they make a 748 based LCF that can haul a whole unassembled 737RS in one go. So start out at one factory and get the nose. Then pick up the wing box and a pair of wings, then pick up the tail and go to the assembly point.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:40 pm

Quoting 797charter (Reply 46):
Some good points, - make sense for me.

You just want to agree so you can charter that 797 sooner...  Wink

But really, Boeing can't sit around and wait as Airbus slowly takes away customers with the A320. Every former Boeing/MD customer who switches to the A320 now is a lost customer for the 737RS for 10 years at least.

Granted, Boeing could win over an airline like B6, but honestly, they really need the 737NG ASAP.

Why? Because right now, any fleet manager in the world could choose either the 737NG or A320 and be justified and not be fired for making a wrong choice. That puts pressure on price. But as soon as the 797 is launched, it makes every fleet manager have to think about the product again, not just the price.

If the modern construction techniques makes each 797 $5 million less to build than a 737NG, and Boeing can sell them for the same price or more because of their efficiency and lower maintenance, that alone makes it an important project.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Boeing: Engines For 737RS Ready By 2011-2012

Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:03 pm

IMHO, the engines are but a part of the overall package for higher efficiencies required for a short haul airliner. Has anyone made a study, for example, to see if the passanger loading time for a dual aisle airliner would be shorter than a single aisle? What would happen in you can actually turn around the airplane in 15 minutes instead of 20 or 25? Does the higher utilization, with the CFRP fuselage, give an improved economic advantage?

What about off the shelf parts, instead of more expensive, custom made parts? There are a whole range of possibilities and increased efficiencies that will make the airlines take notice.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 47):
be interesting to see if they make a 748 based LCF that can haul a whole unassembled 737RS in one go.

The fuselage might still fit within normal transportation methods. It might fit within the loading parameters of the typical locomotives and trucks used right now.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 48):
Every former Boeing/MD customer who switches to the A320 now is a lost customer for the 737RS for 10 years at least.

 checkmark 

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 48):
If the modern construction techniques makes each 797 $5 million less to build than a 737NG, and Boeing can sell them for the same price or more because of their efficiency and lower maintenance, that alone makes it an important project.

But if they sell them for $5 million dollars less, you can have an airline pick up a few more. At least it would give Boeing plenty of leeway in price negotiations.